just tell your boss you didnt write any code coz yu were busy dilating

if you cant compete, just change the system to let you win

i wonder how many of those female names are actually females

Im willing to bet less then 25%

@Deleted User I'm betting that most of them are spiteful trannies

safe bet

https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8lvegd/the_postmeritocracy_manifesto/

@M4Gunner this meme is actually real

yeah i just found that out

those are all real thots at microsoft

https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/61pgiy/coding_in_2017/

its funny how the people that get mad go after peoples appearance, lack of desirableness, etc.
it doesn't really fit the accepting image they try to portray

they instantly turn to bullying

hypocrites

I find it kind a funny that all the females do have a comic instead of there real face, can it be that is not even close what the comic portrays

almost always

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RETRen4oHpo
@meratrix

i'm sure you've seen this gem

yea, they are so far off it comical

there's lying to yourself with pixels again

I mean, who would've thought that the next SJW takeover would've been the fucking Linux kernel?

Like the moves that the SJW's have been making has all been towards hobbies.

Because, you know, Marxists hate work.

i would have expected mostly higher level languages to be affected 😂 🔫

I'm giving that podcast a listen.

I'm always kind of surprised that the whole Free Software concept always seemed to be hard to explain.

The whole point of Free Software is that you're free to openly modify and distribute the software as you wish.

That's all that means. You can have software that's Open Source but not Free.

All Open Source means is that you have access to the Source Code, but you are not free to distribute or modify as you need it.

I do think that the Open Source community did undermine the Free Software movement.

<:Commie_ball:466404411535785995>

I'm not even a communist. I'm staunchly in favor of capitalism.

I actually think that catering to the premise of Intellectual Property, which is what the Open Source movement did, is very anti-capitalist.

Because Software Companies base their business model on the premise that you could treat Software as a physical good, which you can't.

These companies base their model on selling products that can effectively be infinitely reproduced by anybody. Which is insane.

That's an objectively terrible business model.

So, why are we using legislation and licensing to facilitate what is objectively a terrible business model?

I agree Stallman and the Free software is full of dumb communist hippies that think that the Free Software movement will usher in a communist utopia where hobbyists just make whatever software they want, and evil corporations won't make shitty proprietary software.

But that doesn't mean I don't agree with the Free Software philosophy coming from capitalist principles. I think that giving corporations the sole proprietorship to modify and distribute software stifles what should by all means should be freely and openly distributed.

Here's linus talking about why he underminded the FSF
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaKIZ7gJlRU&t=493s

notes: Open Source does not mean corporations have ' proprietorship to modify and distribute software' --i don't know where you heard that
Free Software movement does not give you more access to distribute code overall. You have to familiarize yourself with all the available licensing schemes. Many things called Free Software as in freedom, are actually less permissive. It's not free source code, you owe them back any changes.